Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
rediii

Deep Portbattles and Small ships

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Potemkin said:

I thought the whole purpose of having high BR ports was to create large scale SOL brawls and low/mid BR was where the smaller ships become relevant. If the SOL brawl is irrelevant and battles end before the outcome of the brawl is decided (for the most part), in high BR ports whats the point of having high BR ports? Does no one see an issue with this? 

the problem is that there is no risk sailing a 1st rate rather then 3rd rate in the pb, the only downside is the br difference, but everyone can pump out ships without much cost. The devs said they will give sols some kind of maintanance cost so it would be more risk bringing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Wyy said:

the problem is that there is no risk sailing a 1st rate rather then 3rd rate in the pb, the only downside is the br difference, but everyone can pump out ships without much cost. The devs said they will give sols some kind of maintanance cost so it would be more risk bringing them.

Im not sure exactly what your angle is. Im really only referring to the high end BR ports. Theres always a place for bellonas/wasas in all BR tiers (except shallows obviously). If you cant play out a brawl in the highest BR pbs then there is really no point in having them. Im not trying to shit on anyone who enjoys sailing 6-7th rates, im simply curious as to why they play such a decisive role in battles that, as i understood it, were specifically designed for ships of the line. Its not the direct risk to the 1st rate, its the fact that 3/4 of people in a high tier pb are rendered completely irrelevant to the outcome of the battle and imho it should be the other way around. 1st rate availability and maintenance is another conversation, one that should be had probably, but not one relevant to the point im trying to make. And if your concern is including people who cant sail SoL or need experience in pbs then grind shallows or low tier pbs. 

Its also worth noting that the ease with which fortifications are destroyed and the reward for destroying them only exacerbates this issue. (Disregard if this has changed at all in a recent patch)

Edited by Potemkin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people still don't understand the difference in 'Conquest' gamemode and 'Deathmatch'. You don't win by killing your enemy in PBs but by blocking circles. Same thing as in every other multiplayer game, players become to greedy to kill and forget the main objective.

A PB takes roughly 40 mins right now. In that time just a few first rates will sink, especially with multiple repairs. One could argue to decrease the accumulation of points or even to change the gamemode to our old PB style what now is the PvP event zone ROE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Nelsons Barrel said:

Some people still don't understand the difference in 'Conquest' gamemode and 'Deathmatch'. You don't win by killing your enemy in PBs but by blocking circles. Same thing as in every other multiplayer game, players become to greedy to kill and forget the main objective.

A PB takes roughly 40 mins right now. In that time just a few first rates will sink, especially with multiple repairs. One could argue to decrease the accumulation of points or even to change the gamemode to our old PB style what now is the PvP event zone ROE.

guess u dont understand - its not about killing - its about fun and winning....

do u have more fun kiting for circles 90mins in an upwind ship or by brawling, boarding and fighting other ships....? thats all about in that suggestion....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nelsons Barrel said:

Some people still don't understand the difference in 'Conquest' gamemode and 'Deathmatch'. You don't win by killing your enemy in PBs but by blocking circles. Same thing as in every other multiplayer game, players become to greedy to kill and forget the main objective.

A PB takes roughly 40 mins right now. In that time just a few first rates will sink, especially with multiple repairs. One could argue to decrease the accumulation of points or even to change the gamemode to our old PB style what now is the PvP event zone ROE.

Well if the majority of players want to manuever and cap circles instead of playing battles out then thats just the way it is. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dark lord rediii said:

I use logic and for me it's not logical that you lose a portbattle even if you win the engagement

Win the batle and win the port are two different things. The defense has not the task to win the battle but do what it have to do to not loose the port. In that logic, the Prussian were successfull. They knew that they did not have the more skilled capitain but choosed the right tactic to not loose the port. The Russian side were more skilled but less smart on how to win the port. So well done Prussia!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 circles would be enough, the attackers, the defenders, know yourselves out. What's the point of these forts that don't cover any of the circles? Easy points for the attackers? O.o

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Potemkin said:

Im not sure exactly what your angle is. Im really only referring to the high end BR ports. Theres always a place for bellonas/wasas in all BR tiers (except shallows obviously). If you cant play out a brawl in the highest BR pbs then there is really no point in having them. Im not trying to shit on anyone who enjoys sailing 6-7th rates, im simply curious as to why they play such a decisive role in battles that, as i understood it, were specifically designed for ships of the line. Its not the direct risk to the 1st rate, its the fact that 3/4 of people in a high tier pb are rendered completely irrelevant to the outcome of the battle and imho it should be the other way around. 1st rate availability and maintenance is another conversation, one that should be had probably, but not one relevant to the point im trying to make. And if your concern is including people who cant sail SoL or need experience in pbs then grind shallows or low tier pbs. 

Its also worth noting that the ease with which fortifications are destroyed and the reward for destroying them only exacerbates this issue. (Disregard if this has changed at all in a recent patch)

ahh yeah i missred your comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we had exactly the same thing in Puerto against the French we out fought them in the brawl but they out thought us in the PB it was a harsh lesson one you have to adapt to i guess in this ever evolving game.

I sorta agree the kiting with th p2w ships is boring for me,but that's just me, i know plenty of people  who enjoy sailing them and i would rather PBs be inclusive than exclusive. I then toyed with the idea of shallow ships not being able to enter the largest port battles by BR but to able to enter mid to low Port Br but tbh im just as bored of Ocean v Ocean line fights aswell.

We know nothing on this will change in the near to mid future so i reckon we just have to wait until the next big patch and localization drops before we can even get into improving the experience of Pbs in general.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps a limit could be introduced. i like battles with a varity in ships instead of those 25 vs 25 loceans, it gets old rather fast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Potemkin said:

I thought the whole purpose of having high BR ports was to create large scale SOL brawls and low/mid BR was where the smaller ships become relevant. If the SOL brawl is irrelevant and battles end before the outcome of the brawl is decided (for the most part), in high BR ports whats the point of having high BR ports? Does no one see an issue with this? 

There is a difference where you go for kills or circles. I would like to remind everyone Manataca PB against Russians, we sunk all ships but Mortar Brig and we lost only Belle Poule. Although we lost the port battle, because Mortar Brig (the only Russian alive ship) captured all zones. Same happened on Bermuda where @qw569 on Cerberus? captured zones and won the PB even when RUBLI fleet got destroyed/lost. Port Battle is not clubbing to the death and side with more kills is not necessarly the one that wins. PB is a TACTICAL battle with goals to achieve. Control the zones, main goal, secondary win condition is sink all enemy ships or make them escape the battle. If Prussian fleet was "running away", sounds like opportunity to capture zones and win. It's obvious 1st rates are not designed for speed and capturing task... 

You are wrong about small ships, @dark lord rediii, we don't like them because they give us wins, we like small ships because they are fun hunting boats, great PvP, more dynamic than 6 knots floating battery bricks etc. On top of that many new players can get instantly into RvR with small ships, before rank was a stopping factor from people joining RvR/PB. It might be hard to understand that for someone that's veteran and uses mostly 1st rates and Bellonas for PvP. You love SOLs and we get it.

Just as someone above pointed out, in Cartagena de Indias battle, ALL Spanish ships got sank, yet the port was defended. To make it better in NA, we need adjusted forts/towers to make them more important and nerf Mortar Brigs as they usually destroy forts and towers without big effort (shooting 3 balls from single mortar? That's just bs)

"The city faces the Caribbean to the west; to the south its bay has two entrances: Boca Chica (Little Mouth) and Boca Grande (Big Mouth). Boca Chica historically was the deep water entrance and was so narrow it allowed the passage of only one ship at a time."

 @admin in NA entire "Boca Chica" is shallow, is that intended? Historical sources claim that deep water ships could sail through it while it's not possible in NA.

Last words, Herc and Requin need more BR for better balance in RvR (if admin is against RvR ban for them). Since the last BR balance I said it's bs that pretty much all shallow boats have 80 BR. I know it's because of game mechanics, but it's flawed...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PYR said:

Win the batle and win the port are two different things. The defense has not the task to win the battle but do what it have to do to not loose the port. In that logic, the Prussian were successfull. They knew that they did not have the more skilled capitain but choosed the right tactic to not loose the port. The Russian side were more skilled but less smart on how to win the port. So well done Prussia!

There is a world of difference between fighting a defensive action and an offensive action, in a PB you have both types of battle going on simultaneously. The attacker needs to take territory to win, The defender needs to deny territory to win, in both cases a mixed fleet provides the best options, the attacker needs frigates to take and hold territory, a Mortar brig to suppress forts and Sol's to deny the enemy room to defend his territory, the defender needs frigates to deny circles to the enemy and Sol's to deny the enemy Sol's the opportunity to help his frigates from doing so.

The mix of Sol's too is important, a second or third rate can respond more quickly to an unexpected situation than a first rate and still hold its own, especially against equal and lesser ships, Medium to long range suppression fire can make a huge difference in a rearguard action, or help in securing territory and win the battle.  

The Frigates have a secondary role also, if things go badly wrong for the attacker then then it's the Frigates who get fight to the rear guard action, slow up the SOL's so the more valuable Sols can get out, the defenders Frigates need to prevent the attackers frigates from doing that  so that their own SOL's have the opportunity to engage and sink them before they can escape. The odds are that the defenders may sink the most damaged ships before they can get out, or the attackers lose some frigates but get the Sols away.

While large clans have little difficulty replacing losses it is harder for the small clans to do so, the above tactics benefit them probably more than the large clans, but one, less SOL to replace benefits them as well.

If the the screening fleets are doing their job then there should be little stopping a clean disengagement, and egress from from the battle area. All of this is for nothing if Fleet commanders bring the wrong ships, misuse them, and fail to maintain communications both with the PB Fleet and the Screeners, Every nation, every Commander has made these errors at least once, some learn from them quickly, others are slower to learn, and it does not make them bad Commanders, unless they will not learn.

It may prove to be prudent for the Frigates to be under separate command, as long as the PB Commander can communicate and work with them there should not be any problem, after all, at Trafalgar it was Nelson's planning, but, Collingwood's execution of it that Won the battle, sadly history neglects Collingwood's role.

Everyone enjoys sinking ships, no one particularly enjoys losing them, but, sinking the enemy while fun, is not actually the objective in a PB, the objective is to win the battle, just as the Screener's objective is to buy time, it is within the Open Water sea battles if, and when they occur, that sinking the enemy is the real objective, I think that once this is realised, every battle will have some fun for everyone, and, at the end of the day, we are all here to have fun.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i think it is good that the PB mechanic allows sometime some smart tactics (or Lucky one) to be rewarded by the Victory of the contest and that Victory is not automatically granted to the strongest….. Else we better play cards and the one with the best hand will automatically win… Some variety in ship choices and tactic is good in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive the problem is that we can deny  the enemy team points from their circle with a ship that has less BR. Remove this possibility and small ships are only useful for grabbing empty circles and killing mortar brig. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings,

I do not agree to ban the 6/7th rates from the deep water PBs. Instead i think we should try to persue some way to do incentives and disincentives towards the most realistic and historical situations, while not forbidding the non or less historical and less relistic situations. We play a open world sandbox, so i think we can accept some " what ifs". 

I do confess that im all for realism in game as much as we can. I would like to leave some sugestions about some issues that were raised while this topic is discussed.

First; the balanced and most realistic looking fleets for PBs. 

Too many Oceans in this Ocean, at least in th PBs. How to balance this in an atempt to be close to realistic and historical approach?

There several sugested fixes. IMO in the OW, the way to do this and in general to balance the use of the SOL can be achieved with the introduction of the maintenance but only the maintenance will not fix the hose PBs where we see almost 25 Oceans and only Oceans. After all, even with maintenace, a PB is why these SOL were made for and the expenses are justified.

The way to incentive or disincentive the use of the different ships is easely done, i think, by adjusting their BR. Increase it to make it less apealing but not too much to make it usless. 

I think it would look amazing and feel much more immersive and more Age of sail if we could tend to have PBs where we would see in a fleet something like 2 or 3 1st rates, 3 to 4 2nd rates, 6 or 8 or even 10, maybe more 3rd rates and maybe some optional 4th rates(they were falling in desuse).

I will just throw some numbers trying to justify my point:

 Imagine something like 1st rates BR would be around 950 ( in order to prevent only Oceans, these could have the 950 while the Santissima 850 and the victory 800, to incentive the use of the last 2),. The 2nd rates should be costy in BR but less than the 1st. Maybe something around 700. They are not supposed to be the most numerous of the SOLs. Now to incentive a huge number of 3rd rates, these could have a BR arund 400. 4rth rates do not need a greater incentive compared to the 3rd.

What i wish to say is that we could try to manipulate these BRs to make us search for several strategic choices while having the incentive to close more to the beautiful feeling of the Age of sail in a historical aproach. However not forbidding or preventing less historical choices if someone wishes to try them. That what if.

 

Another sugestion i would like to say is about the PBs mechanics.

I think the 3 circles are an excelent idea and these could represent the disembark points for the attacker force. The main at the center can be the port assault point. the other 2 could represent points to disembark the marines in the coast or beach to make the siege to the city/port. Points granted by the capture of each  of these secondary circles could be half of the main port circle. The port should have the best defenses.

Now what i think would bring a greater feeling for realism. A ship to capture a circle should be completely stop. This would represent the ship disembarking the marines in small boats. It would be wise to do so after dealing with the forts and by beeing imobile they are vulnerable to any other ship attack.

Second, what are the ships disembarking? Marines! So in order for the vessel to be able to capture any circle he must have Marines inside. A slot of the ship knowlege should be used to this. A ship that doesnt bring marines is there only to shoot his cannons, cannot capture.

And for further helping the balance of the use of ships. A SOL can take much more marines than a 5th rate. So a 1st should be the ship that could capture the circle faster while a 5th would capture much slower.

My doubt is about the unrated vessels. they could transport too few marines to influence the land battle. Should they not be allowed to capture circles or maybe they could capture only the main port circle in a very slow pace. I say this because unrated would have few marines but also few small boats to disembark. Instead they themselves could be the disembark ship heading directly to the docks of the port for the assault but to head directly to the beach or shores would not be a wise idea.

 

Finaly, an intersting idea for a issue that was also mentioned. When the attacker sinks most or all the defender ships but still fails to capture the land.

In this situation i would like to sugest some more deeper changes to the PBs. This means the defender kept the port but lost control of the sea to the attacker. I would like to sugest this situation to become a Blockade. This could be mean that another PB is scheduled to the nest day!

And if something i think is unlikely to happen but can happen...Happen?  What if the attacker managed to capture the land and port but lost most or all of his ships? This would be a interesting turn of events: The attacker holds the port now but lost control of the sea, so this port is under blockade and a new PB scheduled to thenext day but this time the former defender is the attacker and former attacker is the defender.

For this to be measured we could have the BR numbers seen in deep waters PBs from and only from the SOL (4th to 1st rates) or should the 5th rates also count and be generic to deep and shallow waters? where only the unrated would not count?

If the BR of one side would be superior to the other by more than 50% the posibility of a blockade would arise. To avoid endless situations, Blockades would be limited to 3. This means at the 3rd day of consecutive blockade PBs attackers and defenders are exaust and must retreat. the one who kept the port won.

 

I would like to know what do you think about these ideas and if anyone could even fine tune them.

My goals were to achieve more historical and realistic balance to decrease the total dominance of the Oceans in the PB, seek more balanced PB fleets where the 3rd rate would be dominant, fto feel the PB strategy more realistic about the circles and the importance of the SOL to the main objective in a PB that is to capture the port, to simulate the disembark and the advantage of the numbers of the marines in each vessel and finaly the feeling of the sea control introducing the blockade.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, dark lord rediii said:

who agree with it that portbattles should be decided by fights and not by holding circles.

Another general question of plausibility and freedom vs. artificial fairness, tactical and sports like ideas. A clear decision just needs to be made... cause both concepts contradict each other. Ultimately it wouldnt matter if we like circles or not, we could just figure out if they are good or bad if we knew what we are aiming for.

Some people like e.g. BR limits cause they like the diversity. But its a heavy restriction. And it contradicts economy by definition. Its complete nonesense when you look at the original game concept.

Has someone thought yet about getting away from a single 25 vs 25 battle deciding about a capture? Cause thats the reason why small ships are useless. 50 ships is a technical limitation, its not there for fairness! Instances wouldnt be there at all if this game would be possible without them. And this pure open world wouldnt be fair... but every ship no matter how small it is would matter. So why arent 40 vs 10 battles possible? Why cant 3+ hostile factions fight each other simultaniously? Why is an 20 vs 20 vs 30  engagement not translated into two ~10 vs 10 vs 15 battles with equally distributed BR? You could also connect simultanious instances and allow players to jump when certain conditions are met. Thats how a proper compromise would look like.

How is it even fair that an 25 vs 40 engagement results in one 25 vs 25 battle? I think thats just stupid for multiple reasons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that there is a problem and it needs to be fixed. However, although I do not like the requins personally, I would not want to remove them from port battles. Instead, requins should be balanced to other ships in game. 

It is in my point of view mandatory to change battle rating of requins to reflect the boarding capability, speed and agility of the ship. Right now, BR is too low, so it is a"cheap" ship to bring in port battles in large numbers.

Another point is the universal superiority of requins: upwind speed, overall speed, agility, crew size, crew resistance to damage, nearly indestructable masts, low freeboard. This is just OP. At least reduce the masts thickness and HP, or crew damage resistance to give the ship at least one weak point. The rest can stay as is then. 

Another point should at least be discussed, which are the conditions for point generation from circles. At the moment it is possible to negate point generation with one ship in a circle. So you can hold points down with a handful of requins even against large fleets without giving an opportunity for battle. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is intresting topic.

 

In port battle main objective is quite clear here can issue come becouse some players just want too kill others play objective yet small ships use in PB is caping circles forcing players too deal with them. in other hand in reality frigates and untrated ships in such big engagements were there to scout,spot and tow cripled lineships as i remember there was even unwriten rule that lineship did not fire on them unless they fired on them first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48FEA72F7E4ED0E1AAD33058E3B7B5A102413E10

This was the deep water port battle at Little Cayman today. The Espana fleet was 75% DLC shallow ships.

Their tactic was never to fight the battle, they only kited and held circles. There is nothing at stake when sailing DLC ships, if their health gets low they can always run away, and if they do sink then another can be redeemed. Also they take zero skill to use, some of the Espana captains were not even manual sailing.

Shallow DLC ships should not be allowed in deep water port battles. It's bad enough that they ruin shallow water port battles with pay to win Requins, if something isn't changed then deep water port battles will go the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, --Privateer-- said:

48FEA72F7E4ED0E1AAD33058E3B7B5A102413E10

This was the deep water port battle at Little Cayman today. The Espana fleet was 75% DLC shallow ships.

Their tactic was never to fight the battle, they only kited and held circles. There is nothing at stake when sailing DLC ships, if their health gets low they can always run away, and if they do sink then another can be redeemed. Also they take zero skill to use, some of the Espana captains were not even manual sailing.

Shallow DLC ships should not be allowed in deep water port battles. It's bad enough that they ruin shallow water port battles with pay to win Requins, if something isn't changed then deep water port battles will go the same way.

Foreword: 8/12 = 2/3 = 66.66%

First: I think you Sir (and I do remember well) used a lot of times kiting techniques.

Second: I am pretty sure that any side set up in the past (granted this PB system) kiting fleet compositions.

Third: I do remember RUBLI Wasas stardestroyers and your flying Ingermanlands on US Coast; was it fair?
Honestly no: it was using the most efficient (and expensive) meta available against probably the worst NA fleet.
Therefore I do not see anything strange having your enemy using metas too. Please note we are not the Devs: we do not change game rules to fit our tastes, still we, like you, try to find best options inside game mechanics at the moment.

Forth: the backbone of this set up was a proposal of mine... based in seeing more and more Deep PBs fought and won around secondary circles by light ships.

Fifth: contrary to original plan the Buce group didnt kite your main fleet but quite straightforwardly charged your battle fleet (Yordi's aggressiveness is quite known I suppose); honestly the only reason we lost one Bucetaure. So we kited far less than we should.

 

That said.

I completely agree, as I wrote plenty times, that DLCs and in general light shipping SHOULD BE BANNED (or made totally unuseful) in Deep PBs making them again great SoLs engagements reworking completely PBs RoEs and objectives.

BUT PBs are that way and it's totally fair thinking to any possible solution to win as it's fair to gear every ship at best for imagined role.
Honestly Sir: what would we read in the forums if Spanish Fleet came with only SoLs, sunk 1 of your SoLs but lost Little Cayman to your Requins and then we started a whining post?
Wouldn't we be mocked for being stupid coming without light ships protecting 2 circles? 

 

PS:
In the end even screening could be (funny, still reasonable) considered unfair de-facto stopping the fair (limited BR) PortBattle itself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×